User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 304 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 62 out of 304

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Apr 1, 2014
    If you could use just one word to describe this film, it is pointless. Just a worthless sequel made with probably some of the weakest story telling ever. There was a lot of cliche things in this film that felt so pointless and stupid; the characters also didn't feel as memorable in this as they did in the first Cars, they just felt bland and also that addition of making Mater like a secret agent or something, that's just not fitting for the Cars series really when comparing this to the first film. It's a shame that Pixar actually made a film like this, I mean PIXAR! The company that has made so many masterpieces like the Toy Story films, Monsters Inc, Finding Nemo, The Incredibles and Wall-E; now this, Pixar's first film that's only point was just to sell a bunch of toys. I would not recommend this film, after seeing this I was hoping that Pixar would never do something like this again, well apparently they inspired The Planes series, which looks terrible (luckily they are not making those) but it doesn't stop there, Pixar may have pleased a lot of fans announcing The Incredibles 2, but while doing that they also displeased us by announcing Cars 3. This is not Pixar, I remember when every film Pixar made was great and had no intention of just existing just to make money, but to also tell amazing stories. While Pixar isn't completely doomed today (I did like MU), I just wonder if they'll ever make a new film that actually has quality and lives up to their oldest and most classic films. Expand
  2. Mar 26, 2014
    Surprisingly, Cars 2 manages to be better than the first Cars by an iota. The scenes are still cheesy and unnecessarily long, and the story is a bore. Skip it.
  3. Nov 14, 2013
    Cars 2 is a disappointment. If a studio such as Dreamworks or Sony Animation were making this I’d be more lenient. But this is Pixar we are talking about. The studio is much better than this. I don’t know what to say. I want to say this is good but I’m not really sure what they were thinking. I’m as baffled as the cars in the movie were when McQueen moves to the outside lane. The Toy Story short at the start of the movie was better the film itself. If you’re a kid or a Mater fan you’ll love this movie. However, anyone who believes that Cars 2 will be another masterpiece from Pixar forget it. Cars 2 is a disappointing movie that has made me lose trust in studio that until now has been flawless. Expand
  4. Oct 31, 2013
    in my opinion thisis the worst film that walt disney pixar has ever made so far,the first movie wasn't so good at all,this second movie is even worst then the first one.
  5. Oct 11, 2013
    As a pixar loved, I loved the first cars (well technically all of them), but the second was a BIG MESS! What happened here? boring characters, predictable spy plot and a lot more!
    Try harder, Pixar.
  6. Aug 26, 2013
    I would rate this as a four if it were made by some other studio, but Pixar? We expect better!
    The first Cars film was just boring, this one is insipidly stupid. My little sister who is barely past the age of six couldn't enjoy this film.
  7. Jul 29, 2013
    As a huge fan of pixar I had high hopes for this movie after finding the original fairly enjoyable but this film just annoyed me. The worst and most irritating character from the original film (Mater) is made the main focus of this movie, and he is insufferable. In my opinion this character rivals jar-jar binks in terms of being incredibly annoying. The overall plot of the film is a spy flick crossed with some fast and furious for kids action. The portions with mater are annoying and the portions with the racing are nothing new or exciting, I did not laugh at any of the jokes, which compared to pixars other movies, some of which are incredibly funny, is very disappointing. The films animation is top notch, so it is at least nice to look at but other than that the movie is by far the worst pixar has ever created. Expand
  8. Jul 14, 2013
    Pixar jamas ha logrado tan bajo desempeño en sus peliculas se supone que pixar se saca las mejores peliculas no las peores una pelicula que destroza la buena reputacion de Cars.
  9. Jul 22, 2012
    Okay Pixar has let us down completely, Cars 2 is boring, occasionally funny, and just terrible story telling right in the middle of it. And um where is all the heart Cars had which got it all the good reviews. Hmm Pixar can we trust you. And most of all making another Cars means that this franchise has no place in the other world that Pixar has created. Which makes it the more disappointing. I give this film a 32% of a good movie. Expand
  10. Jun 14, 2012
    I think Cars is one of the most overrated movies in the Disney/Pixar universe because I thought this was supposed to be an original look for Cars 2 (the same as the original Cars movie), but I find it a little less violent and the James Bond-type spy theme just isn't the type of script or design Pixar has hoped for. I loved how they done Toy Story and all of the critically-acclaimed movies that we shared and thinking of the great moments since Oscar night arrives. Cars 2 just wasn't in the Oscar picture, it was the first and only movie not to receive an Oscar nomination because of the bad criticism these critics and fans felt. So I'm hoping that Disney/Pixar could put Brave to #1. It's a new year and hopefully they'd better not make the same mistakes as Cars 2 did. Cars 2 is one of the big disappointments of 2011. Expand
  11. May 10, 2012
    I was very disappointed with this film. It showed so much potential to be good but it was not at all good. The humor was very blank and the storyline seemed to drift off in some moments. 2 out of 10
  12. Dec 20, 2011
    I have seen all Pixer films and its totally clear to me that this is the worst movie that they made , I can't believe an Pixer film could be this much worst . What did they just do ? The animation was good but the story sucked 100% and it was less funny then any Animation film ever made . The starting was good (when L returned home) but after that all went to hell . Request to Pixer not to make this mistake ever please . Expand
  13. Dec 19, 2011
    Part 2 falls flat on its face, the story plot is too deep for young minds, too much gun play for a childrens movie, my wife and I walked out about half way through. Probably one of the worst movies I have seen in a long, long, long time.
  14. Nov 27, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is the first time I have felt so let down by a Pixar film. Cars 2 exploded into the cinemas with such great expectations usually filled by the magicians over at Pixar, particularly after their first great hit with Cars; however, these expectations were not met and, subsequently, what was once a good idea has now been squandered.

    Pixar should not be slated entirely, however; they still maintained their impeccable graphics, character reactions and humour input in Cars 2, yet the film lacked a general sense of any sort of storyline. We see our favourite character Lightning McQueen burst back into the fray near the beginning of the film when, without any sort of heads up, the audience suddenly discovers he has won the Piston Cup four times, is now officially going out with Sally and Doc Hudson has died. This is just the start of what created such a flat effort for a film; new character introductions were brief, the attempt at a storyline was sloppy and there was no effort to show how amazing Lightning McQueen was at racing. The whole film revolved around a brand-new renewable fuel for cars called Allinol and, ever since its introduction, conquered the whole film in every scene possible. Okay, so maybe the film was about Allinol and how it was going to be used to kill Lightning McQueen in a very dramatic way, but I just miss the ideology behind the original Cars. Another main problem lies with Lightning McQueen's recession into more of a background character; the main character becomes Mater who, in short, is a funny character, but his characteristic traits can only be stretched out by so much and 106 minutes is far too stretched. Pixar are now to redeem themselves and prove to their countless fans that they can produce another decent film with a great backing storyline mixed with characters you are forced to love and hate. Pixar's new film, Brave, now has very high expectations in order to excuse this below-par effort at a film, for never before have I been disappointed in a Pixar film.
  15. Oct 16, 2011
    Cars wasn't Pixar's finest hour but it had style, it was still clever, with some fantastically funny moments. It also had a novelty factor working in its favour. Cars 2 doesn't have that to fall back on and because it lacks the heart of the first its just a shell of a movie.
    Cars 2 represents an amalgam of recycled jokes, ideas and images from every other film that came before it and
    because of that you feel empty after having seen it, as if you went to a nice restaurant expecting a big piece of meat but instead you got a salad.
    Cars 2 moves away from the original in favour of turning the franchise into a comedy spy thriller, because that always works out so well (Get Smart, Johnny English 1 & 2). The introduction of Michael Caine's Finn McMissile does add an element of humour and entertainment but the fact that the film concentrates more on Mater (Larry the Cable Guy) than Lightning McQueen (Owen Wilson) seemed like a good idea but it eventually grates. Overall by moving away from Cars in favour of making the 2nd film more lively it has taken away some of the things that really did make Cars enjoyable.
  16. Sep 2, 2011
    I consider myself a great Pixar fan, I have loved every movie since Toy Story but in this one, I can just say: I **** HATE MATER!!! .
  17. Aug 16, 2011
    Disney/Pixar destroyed a great story with violence and lots of GUNS!

    What happened? They destroyed a great story. Cars was a wonderful movie with a beautiful message and no violence. Now, Cars 2 is just an attempt to make a Hollywood action film (supposedly for kids). Guns? Really? And then we complain about kids with guns?! The violence includes guns, shooting, explosions, death..
    Furthermore they make Mater look as ignorant as the rest of the world sees us. There is also some alcohol...I will never buy this movie for my son, who by the way didn't enjoy this film as much as the first one any ways. People in charge of story lines are way off if their target are kids and parents who will pay for the crap they want! Expand
  18. Aug 7, 2011
    Terrible Terrible ! I Adored Cars 1 , But this oh myy.. Can they really have Cars MURDERING each other in kids movie ? Im sitting there with my 4 year old tot and cars are murdering and carrying weapons , barking death threats oh my gosh it was just WOAH ! Well who are we to talk , Pixars making MILLIONS AND MILLIONS off merchandising . Wait.. Oh ya ! Thats why Cars 2 was released. Oh the money (:
  19. Aug 5, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A VHS copy of the musical "Hello, Dolly" is the robot's most-prized possession. "WALL-E", a lonely earthbound portable garbage compactor, makes a recording of the duet "It Only Takes a Moment" because the song moves him, inspiring the machine to hold his own hand, in imitation of the characters who have fallen for each other, from a long-ago past when the planet was habitable. Nothing green grows on earth anymore. The detritus of human civilization, bearing a color scheme that's nearly monochromatic in its brownness, is all that's left. Overrun by trash, entire populations boarded vast spaceships, leaving WALL-E behind with the endless job of minimizing waste into stacked cubes, while the planetary refugees floated around space in what are, essentially, movable countries, displaced indefinitely from their homes. But what does hardware know about love? How can something made out of microprocessors and integrated circuits develop a consciousness? At what point in time did "it" evolve and become a "he"? It's only a matter of time before robots like Eve(as in Adam &) supplant a human race made morbidly obese by generation upon generation of insentient living. Whereas "WALL-E" presents a dystopian take on our extrapolated planet that's easily identifiable, "Cars 2"(and "Cars"), obscures the nightmarish elements of a four-wheeled society through the audience's supposition that this largely inorganic world is an alternate one. Under closer scrutiny, "Cars" starts to look more and more Cronenberg-ian, in which the pornography of auto fetishism in "Crash" actually gets put into practice. Let's meet the Flintstones again. Similar to the animated series, with its parodic names like Rock Quarry and Cary Granite to corroborate the Jurassic Period setting, both films use car-centric names(Bob Cutlass, Brent Mustangburger) as a means of harmonizing its metal beings with this variant earth. But when it comes to places, in which Bedford becomes Bedrock, the conversion process stalls in "Cars 2" stalls, leaving the names of Paris, Tokyo, and London in its original incarnation, and furthermore, the landmarks of the cities(for instance, the Eiffel Tower) remain unaltered. Where are we, exactly? In "Planet of the Apes", the astronaut learns that he traveled across time, not space, when he discovers Lady Liberty in ruins, decapitated and rusting, along the shoreline of what turns out to be the Atlantic Ocean. Dr. Zaius' best efforts to perpetuate the long-standing notion of simian superiority is undermined by a chimpanzee, the archaeologist Cornelius, who unearths artifacts which proves that apes evolved from man during his cave excavations in the forbidden zone. "Cars" shares with "Planet of the Apes" the same conspiracy: the suppression of evolution. While remaining silent on the subject of man, despite the cars' admission that dinosaurs existed, they give themselves away, therefore deeming full disclosure of the timeline a moot point. Unlike Dreamworks, whose "Shrek" films employ a lot of pop culture references, Pixar avoids such anachronisms(the post-modernism of pastiche) yet in "Cars", Kenny G.'s "Songbird" scores a cheap laugh when a car gang puts Mack to sleep with the easy-listening jazz, causing the truck to lose his precious cargo(Lightning McQueen). This instrumental, like the videotape in "Wall-E", proves that man existed. Quite possibly, he's the missing link. Bolstering this theory, a VW bus, an auto-hippie, without any spoofing appellation, names Hendrix, after a military jeep voices his displeasure with the metalized version of "The Star-Spangled Banner". This is our earth, not some near-identical equivalent, like the one in the Tim Burton remake, where the film ends with a man staring aghast at the Lincoln Memorial, augmented with ape-like features. These cars are partly human. Vestiges of their humanity can be glimpsed in their faces. In addition to the eyes, Lightning has a tongue, while Mater sports buckteeth like a hayseed. And somewhere in the recesses of their "brains", these evolved vehicles remember sex. In "Cars", Mater throws Lightning into a homosexual panic as the tow-truck uses his hook on the auto racing car's undercarriage(read; sodomy). Likewise, the spy in "Cars 2", as suggested by the double entendre inherent in the name Holly Shiftswell, denotes a woman who was mustard in the sack. Unlike "Planet of the Apes", perhaps the conspiracy is an extra-diegetic one. In "Cars", Sally waxes nostalgic about Radiator Springs in the fifties. This history runs concurrently with the our timeline. What if she's lying? What if the conspiracy is the film itself, in which the narrators, both omniscient and first-person are fallible? In the climactic race for the coveted Piston Cup("Cars"), a blimp hanging over the stadium reads "Light Year". It's a clue. Exactly what year is it in this planet of the cars? Maybe these aren't Anno Domini times. Expand
  20. Aug 2, 2011
    As a major Pixar-Disney film lover, this film crushed my heart into a million pieces. I openly hated the first Cars film, but convinced myself this was Pixar's way of apologizing and making up for it. Going into the film with incredibly low expectations (for both my memory of the first and poor reviews critically) the film was still worse than I would had anticipated. The characters are one-note, we never see anything endearing about these characters or really get to know them on a personal level. They do not have the instant lovable quality of any other characters which is not just because they are cars, Wall-E made robots look cute and cuddly after all. For a studio as progressive as Pixar I found the portrayals of characters in the film to be stereotypical and unfair and bad representations of the countries in this film (as the plot takes place and features characters from around the globe.) Mater is the single worst character in Pixar's history and it is a slap in the face that they made him an even larger part in the sequel, which is no doubt the worst film in Pixar's history, it should have been scrapped or made straight to dvd. I have faith in them still, as I loved the Toy Story short before this atrocious film. Fingers crossed for Brave and all their future ventures. Expand
  21. Jul 31, 2011
    This movie is a total cash in. Worst Pixar movie. The great thing about Pixar movies is that they appeal to a wide audience, but not this movie. If you have kids under 5 and want to take them to see an okay movie this one will suffice. Pixar should stop making sequels an go back to being original. (they got lucky with Toy Story and should stop with 3). There is no emotional attachment to the characters in this movie like there are in other Pixar movies and the dialogue is terrible. If you like Mater you might like this movie but I don't think you can have a movie centered around your comic relief. Expand
  22. Jul 25, 2011
    You think that Pixar would learn there mistakes with the first one and try to improve it, the answer is no. Not only is the plot rediculous since it takes plot elements from The World is Not Enough and North By Northwest making it the most unoriginal animated feature since Alpha and Omega. it doesn't even bother to develop the characters new and old.
    Another terrible idea is Mater having
    more screen time. I mean c'mon he had more screen time in those Mater shorts. It tries to do a spoof of the spy genre but the jokes are to predictible and makes it looked like it was made in the sixties. Not even the supporting actors like Michael Caine (who's probably having nightmares of his experience in Jaws 4) and Emily Mortimer can save this from being overshadowed by another animated sequel (Kung Fu Panda 2) which I rather rewatch than see this again.
    While Toy Story had great sequels thanks to great plots and character development, this you could considered as the black sheep of the Pixar canon.
  23. Jul 17, 2011
    Pixar's first terrible film. Mediocre storyline, broken script, useless 3D, bad voice acting, and more espionage than races makes from this sequel an absolute rip-off from James Bond.
  24. Jul 5, 2011
    We didn't make it to the end of the movie. My daughter was so bored she was running around. We had to leave and that did not bother me. I guess I will get it when it comes out on DVD but I am glad I did not pay for 3D.
  25. Jul 2, 2011
    It is a real shame to see Pixar finally release a bad film after such a wonderful streak of excellent animated films that are perfect for both adults and children alike. Cars 2 was just a completely unnecessary idea and obviously only exists for Disney to sell more toy cars to children. It's a shame, too, because Pixar is better than this. Cars 1 was average at best and by far the worst of Pixar's outings, yet they are forced to push out a sequel to it instead of more deserving films like The Incredibles. This film just shouldn't have been done and hopefully there will never be a Cars 3 because I don't want Pixar's legacy to be tainted further. Avoid this one. Expand
  26. Jul 1, 2011
    This movie lacked a few things like: A coherent storyline, compelling or likable characters, and, generally, everything that made most Pixar movies memorable. It was clear that many people were losing interest in the movie, kids and adults alike, as people struck up conversations, or walked about. While watching, I couldn't help but feel that this was similar to early Dreamworks Animation movies that tried to copy Pixar's style rather than an actual Pixar film. All in all, it felt like a cash grab that purposely misled customers through their ads by not telling us that Mater was the lead in this film - not Lightning McQueen as the ads portrayed. Expand
  27. Jun 30, 2011
    There are many things that are just wrong with this movie. This movie was unwarranted. The first movie ended at a good note and didn't need any following, plus the story they went with is unnecessary. I don't know about most people, but I didn't need to see a movie where the characters travel to a World Grand Prix, which is pretty much a story line that could have been used as an epilogue for the first movie. The spy story line was fun for the first scene but quickly transformed into a pointless story line for the only purpose of giving Mater more screen time and creating situations that he can act "wacky" in. The movie also attempts to cover up the fact that it was made for money by making some half-assed message about friendship. However, the animation is great, which is no surprise for Pixar, so the whole movie is far from being ugly like some other animated movies (Gnomeo and Juliet for example). Some parts are enjoyable, and I wasn't quite depressed until I got out of the theater and stopped trying to create excuses for the film because it's Pixar. I hope Brave and Monsters University is better than this. Expand
  28. Jun 28, 2011
    Ok I agree that the animation is really good, but the complicated plot was definitely not made thinking of a young (little kids 3-8 year olds)

    Most of the reviews that gave them a 10 or a positive review was thinking as an adult but if you remember that this movie is supposed to be for little kids, they failed tremendously.

    I was completely shock with the amount of guns and violence,
    seriously for a pixar's movie, how can Disney allow this?

    As a mom of 3 little boys who adored cars and their whole world and my wallet was all about cars they really messed it up. They were frightened by all the gun power of the first 5 minutes and they were lost in the plot.

    Who ever made the plot (probably a James Bond Fan) totally forgot who his target audience was, young children!

    Do NOT take your little kids to watch this movie unless they are over 8 probably or take them if you are one of those parents who could care less about the amount of violence their child's watches
    The toy story short at the beginning is the only true terrific thing about the movie and the animation, the technical part.
  29. Jun 28, 2011
    My 3.5 year old boy loves all Pixar movies, as do I. Cars 2 should be rated PG, not G, as it IS very violent. Guns, explosions, and killing/death are what the entire movie consists of, oh yeah and racing. We are trying to limit the amount of violence/weapons our son intakes. If you remember, even in Toy Story, Woody never had a gun in his holster, always empty. I don't necesarily mind that Pixar went this route cause it's not there job to cater to young children. I am however disapointed that the MPAA approved a G rating for this film when it CLEARLY should be PG. Expand
  30. Jun 27, 2011
    Very disappointing! Rambo is a kid story compared to this unbelievable Cars 2! If I knew the movie would be so violent I wouldn't take my son to watch it!

Mixed or average reviews - based on 38 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 38
  2. Negative: 4 out of 38
  1. Reviewed by: Ian Freer
    Jul 18, 2011
    It's not vintage Pixar, but Cars 2 is still streets ahead of most of the animated pack. For all its energy and Bondian panache, perhaps its problems are insurmountable: Pixar's cars - and their universe - don't resonate and endear as much as its toys, monsters, clownfish and OAP dreamers.
  2. Reviewed by: J.R. Jones
    Jun 30, 2011
    A rare dud from Pixar.
  3. Reviewed by: Peter Rainer
    Jun 26, 2011
    Marginally better than its predecessor, but the same problem still remains: Cars just aren't very interesting as anthropomorphic animation vehicles (pun intended).